Posted on 02/19/2009 11:41:26 AM PST by J. Neil Schulman
Warning: This article contains sexually explicit language.
I’ve been a libertarian my entire adult life. Libertarianism, as I’ve been an apologist for it, is a philosophy promoting individual rights, civil liberties, and the freedom to have manifest destiny over one’s own life and property. I am opposed to the government telling people what they can do with their minds and bodies. I am consistent on this whether the issue is consensual intimate relations between adults, or the freedom to self-medicate and self-entertain oneself using the agricultural or pharmaceutical product of one’s choice, or the responsibility of parents to choose what their children are taught about how the human race came to be, or whether it’s regarding the decision of a woman not to carry a fetus to term in her womb.So when I have to explain to my daughter, who phone-banked in the November 2008 election against California’s Proposition 8 by which the California electorate voted to amend their Constitution restricting marriage to heterosexual couples, why I’m opposed to California courts overturning the vote she lost, it requires an explanation of my grounding principles and my firmly grasping sharp ideological nettles.
Let there be no mistake. I favor absolute equality in law for adult individuals who prize the liberty to have intimate relations with, fall in love with, and make life commitments to other individuals of their own gender. I favor laws enabling institutions to grant equity to same-sex couples in matters of habitation, inheritance, taxation, hospital visitation and fiduciary decision-making. If there are to be civil rights laws forbidding discrimination in employment, housing, and use of common facilities, and laws forbidding hate crimes, on the basis of race, color, religion, or ethnic origin, then I see no reason why gender preference is worth either less or more than these other collective categories for receiving grants of legal protection.
But none of that means I’m going to favor up-ending constitutional principles to favor a specific group’s pleadings, nor do I think a struggle for civil rights entitles one to thuggery, nor am I willing to embrace hypocrisy, the destruction of language, rewriting history, and lies just because some people have justifiable grievances.
Let’s start with the lies contained in the use of two common terms: “homosexual” and “gay.”
There is no such thing as “homo” sexuality, unless by that term you are referring to sexual relations between two members of the species homo sapiens.
Sexuality refers to the natural biological processes by which living organisms reproduce. In mammals, primates, and homo sapiens, this natural process requires gametes supplied by both males and females. Gametes supplied by two males will not cause reproduction. Gametes supplied by two females will not cause reproduction. Only gametes supplied by the copulation of males and females will cause reproduction – and you can teach whatever propaganda you like in taxpayer-funded and politically decided “sex education” curricula and no children will result from the attempts of the students to copulate otherwise.
This is not to say that everything that heterosexuals do with each other is sex, either. It isn’t. The term “oral” sex is also a misnomer, as I’m sure former President William Jefferson Clinton would be happy to inform you. Neither is “anal” sex a biologically correct term. Despite parental or church propaganda, sticking a penis in either a mouth or an anus cannot lead to pregnancy. If Juno had given her boyfriend a blowjob there would have been an entirely different movie.
Non-progenitive behavior is sex play, power play, love play, or molestation, depending on the intents and consent of the participants. But inasmuch as no reproduction can result, these are not sex acts and those engaging in them are not defined by their acts as “sexuals,” homo, hetero, or else wise.
In my 1983 novel, The Rainbow Cadenza, I invented a neologism to describe men who were physically attracted only to other men. I called them “andromen” using the Greek root for male. I’ll continue using my own term for the remainder of this screed. The term “lesbian” needs no redefinition and I’ll continue using it as well.
From the standpoint of reproductive biology, andromen and lesbians are chaste. They may cohabitate, and love each other. They may pair-bond into brotherhoods, sisterhoods, or families. But unless they find a partner of the opposite sex to mix their gametes with, they are not sexually active. Any condoms they use are solely for the purpose of preventing the spread of diseases, which not only are sexually transmitted but also non-sexually transmitted through intimate encounters that exchange bodily fluids. But these condoms are irrelevant to preventing a pregnancy, which can not result from these intimacies.
So let’s put another lie to bed. AIDS is not only a Sexually Transmitted Disease; it is also a Non-Sexually-Transmitted Disease. I would dare say that it would be hard to find a case where the HIV virus was ever transmitted through a sexual encounter in a San Francisco “gay” bath house -- unless one of the participants was a female pretending to be a male and the male partner was somehow manipulated into inserting his penis into her vagina and ejaculating therein.
Since males who are attracted only to other males are sexually abstinent, they are perfect candidates for the Roman Catholic priesthood, which requires their priests to be celibate – that is, to refrain from marriage. Likewise, lesbians – being sexually abstinent – are perfect candidates to be nuns, since their “marriage” to Christ need never be physically consummated. For some reason I’ve never been able to fathom, neither the Roman Catholic hierarchy nor the activist movements for andromen and lesbians are comfortable with this obvious lifestyle perfection.
And, in my opinion, the unwillingness of “gay” organizations to stand up for Catholic priests when they are caught engaging in non-sexual acts with other males is the sheerest hypocrisy and poltroonery.
While we’re at it, let’s dispose of the label “gay.” It’s false-to-fact propaganda. Being physically attracted only to members of one’s own sex does not make one happier than being physically attracted to members of the opposite sex. If anything, the social stigma has tended to cause a great deal of unhappiness. Being expressively flamboyant, liking Broadway show tunes, being artistically creative, and liking gourmet cooking may indeed make one gay. By those definitions I am gay. But I’m not willing to stick my penis into another man’s anus or mouth, or have another man stick his penis into mine, to complete my initiation.
I understand that scriptures deriving from the Hebrews – Jewish, Christian, and Islamic – have been interpreted as being harsh toward same-sex couplings. I’ve read the Bible and I understand why ancient nomadic tribes, being low population and economically marginal, placed a high utility on reproductive behavior -- and why their cultures reflected an understandable hostility towards gangs of thugs sneaking into their camps and molesting their men. I just don’t think God’s instructions to these ancients was specifically applicable to men who set up housekeeping in West Hollywood or the Castro.
But it’s offensive to me when a church service is invaded by something that looks like the cast of the Rocky Horror Picture Show. It’s offensive to me when an old lady holding a cross at an anti-Proposition 8 protest has the cross ripped from her hands and stomped on. I understand the long-standing provocations but this grudge match between Queers and Bible Thumpers has got to stop.
What also has to stop is the attempt by andromen and lesbians to norm social acceptance of their lifestyle preferences by pretending that marriage is a civil right they are being denied. Marriage has always required consummation and this they cannot do with each other.
Nor is it right that in their hunger for social acceptance they are willing to corrupt the judicial system such that a state’s attorney general and state judges sworn to uphold a state’s constitution – and deriving whatever legitimate authority they have from that constitution -- are demanded to ignore a polity’s majority vote to enshrine a millennial-old custom in their state’s constitution, and stage a political coup to overturn it.
My darling daughter.
You want to disestablish marriage as a legally regulated institution entirely? As a libertarian, I’m with you.
You want to amend the California constitution so that any two or more adults who want to get married – including groups of men and women in any number and mixture – may legally do so … I’ll cross the border from my home state of Nevada to help you campaign for it.
But don’t tell me that “gays” have a greater right to marriage than Mormon-offshoot polygamists. That sort of special pleading that ignores the historical discrimination against others just revolts me. If you want your daddy to line up with you to defend someone’s civil rights, then they’re going to have to respect the civil rights of everyone else and not expect more political privileges than any other homo sapiens – whether we homos arrived on this planet through the good graces of God or Charles Darwin.
# J. Neil Schulman is a libertarian writer, activist, and filmmaker.
PetroniusMaximus wrote: “50sDad said it better that I, but what I am getting at is that in the Genesis passages the crowd of Sodomites takes on a life of it’s own. It’s almost like a ravenous beast. It won’t listen to reason and it won’t be thwarted until it gets what it wants - the satisfaction of it’s lust. If violence is necessary, then so be it.”
That equally describes any mob, whether it’s a lynch mob, or a union picket line attacking a “scab,” or Ku Klux Klansmen attacking a black church, or a mob blocking the way into an abortion clinic. Ask any street cop who had to gear up during the 1992 L.A. riots, or in Seattle when the World Trade Organization was meeting, or even a sports celebration that gets out of hand. When the mob gets riled up they’re a wild beast ... and you don’t have to be an androman to abandon one’s human reason and revert to wildness.
Neil
Thank you! :-)
anniegetyourgun posted on Thursday, February 19, 2009 11:51:03 AM “This guy is of his father, the devil....so he should not wonder why his daughter follows along on the same wide path - which leads to destruction.”
Then you just wrote, “I didn’t say the guy was the devil....stop lying.”
But you did say it (as anyone can read up to see) and I’m not lying ... which means you just did.
Neil
“That equally describes any mob, whether it’s a lynch mob, or a union picket line”
A mob will come and go.
The sodomites, because they can’t be satisfied, won’t go away.
Slightly off topic, but you might find this interesting...
When Homosexuals Take Over A Church
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1024260/posts
AGYG<----shaking the dust off my sandals now.
“I am simply discerning truth from a lie in his statement. Forgetting the political argumentation - which is vain discussion in light of eternity anyway! And, no - I don’t thank him for this potty-mouthed tripe.”
Speaking as a committed Christian, it’s this type of attitude that puts people off of even considering the possibility of examining a Christian life. You’ve made zero attempt at reaching this person where they live.
God isn’t going to knock a person out of their car on the way to work and speak to them. Most people look at how Christians conduct themselves in their lives and public discourse before considering the appropriateness of that in their lives.
Considering your job is to help bring people to Christ, vain political stuff like that is anything but vanity. As for the potty-mouth tripe, its a judgement call, isn’t it? I’m not sure either you are I are billeted for making judgements of any sort, since we are all unworthy from the get go.
Something to consider.
It's not the job of the State to babysit irresponsible people. If their paperwork isn't up to date, tough noogies for them.
L
PetroniusMaximus wrote: ““That equally describes any mob, whether it’s a lynch mob, or a union picket line.’ A mob will come and go. The sodomites, because they can’t be satisfied, won’t go away.”
Dude, you’re obviously not a member of MY union. :-)
anniegetyourgun wrote:
“I said he is of his father...the devil. I didn’t say he is the devil.”
Actually, my dad was a concert violinist: http://www.juliusschulman.com/.
He only played fiddle better than the Devil. :-)
Neil
PetroniusMaximus wrote:
“Slightly off topic, but you might find this interesting...
“When Homosexuals Take Over A Church
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1024260/posts
So after the gay activists take over a church and alienate the original congregants to the point that they leave, what have they won except real estate?
Neil
PetroniusMaximus wrote:
“Slightly off topic, but you might find this interesting...
“When Homosexuals Take Over A Church
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-religion/1024260/posts
So after the gay activists take over a church and alienate the original congregants to the point that they leave, what have they won except real estate?
Neil
Homosexual Agenda Ping
Freepmail wagglebee or DirtyHarryY2K to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda ping list.
Be sure to click the FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search link for a list of all related articles. We don't ping you to all related articles so be sure to click the previous link to see the latest articles.
Add keywords homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list.
Checkout: http://SilencingChristians.com
“Since males who are attracted only to other males are sexually abstinent, they are perfect candidates for the Roman Catholic priesthood, which requires their priests to be celibate – that is, to refrain from marriage. Likewise, lesbians – being sexually abstinent – are perfect candidates to be nuns, since their “marriage” to Christ need never be physically consummated. For some reason I’ve never been able to fathom, neither the Roman Catholic hierarchy nor the activist movements for andromen and lesbians are comfortable with this obvious lifestyle perfection.
And, in my opinion, the unwillingness of “gay” organizations to stand up for Catholic priests when they are caught engaging in non-sexual acts with other males is the sheerest hypocrisy and poltroonery.”
First off -your Clintonesque parsing of meaning in regard to sexual activity ONLY pertaining to procreation is what keeps most of your arguments afloat. Take away this different meaning of is and your house of cards falls apart...
Lastly, as to Catholic Priests. Take a gander at “Concerning the Criteria for the Discernment of Vocations with Regard to Persons with Homosexual Tendencies in View of Their Admission to the Seminary and to Holy Orders.” (link follows) and correct your flawed perspective:
http://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/ccehomosex.HTM
“So after the gay activists take over a church and alienate the original congregants to the point that they leave, what have they won except real estate?”
They have won a piece real estate that will no longer opposes their agenda. And in the long term strategy, they have won another battle in the long war to overtake and silence one of the only elements of society that still calls sodomistic behavior sinful - the Christian church.
Another person posted this.
http://SilencingChristians.com
Even if you don’t agree with all their points, it’s worth a view. It documents the systematic attempt of sodomites/andromen to silence and convert their opposition.
Okay. They die. Where does their stuff go?
Applause! And Bump
And that is where he lost me as well, Suzi.
This statement alone shows that, in general, your interpretation would be based in error. The only true interpretation of scripture does not come from self but from the Holy Spirit. (Even scripture says that.)
Hey Pope Neil,
You are indeed an interesting read. You’ve made my day, I praise God all day long for being raised Catholic.
But I am so glad that there are a few things we agree on, keep thinking, keep discussing, that’s what makes FreeRepublic an addiction for me. God Bless Jim Robinson and every man and woman who contribute to this blog.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.